SynthesisOrthopaedic surgery2025
Minimal Clinically Important Differences in Conservative Treatment Versus Hip Arthroscopy for Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome: A Frequentist Meta-Analysis of RCTs.
Synthesis in Orthopaedic surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Minimal Clinically Important Differences in Conservative Treatment Versus Hip Arthroscopy for Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome: A Frequentist Meta-Analysis of RCTs.Orthopaedic surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Hip arthroscopy in Sweden: a nationwide registry study of socioeconomic characteristics, regional variation, and sick leave patterns.Acta orthopaedica · 2026Article
- Large language models are comparable with commonly used statistical software: A validation of GPT 5.1 for frequentist meta-analysis in orthopaedics.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2026Article
- The impact of early postoperative pain interference on 2-year outcomes after hip arthroscopy.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2026Article
- Quantitative measurements for acetabular cartilage delamination on MRI.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2026Article
- Evaluating ChatGPT-5's Performance in Answering Common Patient Questions About Femoroacetabular Impingement and Hip Arthroscopy.Indian journal of orthopaedics · 2026Article
- Reliable enough to guide care? An umbrella review of hip arthroscopy meta-analyses 2020-2025.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2026Review
- Assessing the Quality and Accuracy of ChatGPT-3.5 Responses to Patient Questions About Hip Arthroscopy.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Observational
- MCID normalization: A methodological framework for harmonizing heterogeneous PROMs in hip arthroscopy research.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Several meta-analyses of surgical versus non-operative treatment of femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) have been published, but reliable evidence is still lacking. The aim of this meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was to assess the outcomes of FAIS patients treated conservatively compared with those treated with hip arthroscopy (HAS). PubMed, CENTRAL of the Cochrane Library, Epistemonikos, and Embase databases were searched up to March 31, 2025. Quality was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool, the level of evidence for each outcome parameter was determined using the GRADE system, and publication bias was presented in funnel plots. In a common effect and random effects meta-analysis, mean differences (MDs) between the conservative treatment group and the HAS group were calculated with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using the Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman heterogeneity estimator. A total of 7 RCTs with a total of 489 patients in the conservative treatment group and 484 patients in the HAS group met the inclusion criteria. Of the 7 RCTs included, four were assessed as having a low risk of bias, one as having a moderate risk of bias, and two as having a high risk of bias. The outcomes "post-intervention functional MCID" and "iHOT at ≤ 12 months post-intervention" had a high level of evidence, and the outcome "HOS-ADL at ≤ 8 months post-intervention" had a moderate level of evidence. No significant publication bias was detected for any outcome. The HAS group had a statistically significant 0.85 higher post-intervention functional MCID (common effect model: MD: 0.85 CIs 0.53-1.17; random effects model: MD: 0.85 CIs 0.64-1.06; I
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.